"Neotropic"
was adopted over "Olivaceous" as the name for this species in SACC
Proposal 3. The "Neotropics" are a region. "Neotropical"
would describe something from the Neotropics. "Neotrophic" might refer
to some new use of food resources. However, "Neotropic" is not, as
far as I am aware, a word - unless its wide use for this species could be
regarded as having created a new one. Dickinson (2003) adopted
"Neotropical Cormorant" for Phalacrocorax
brasilianus and forms the baseline for SACC, thus this is a rare example of
deviation from that publication. I understand from Edward Dickinson (who
recently pointed out this English language error to me) that adoption of
"Neotropical" was a late change to his checklist and made for the
reasons set out above.

Comments from Stiles: "YES. I«ve always wondered about this one
- I«ve never seen "Neotropic" used as an adjective except for the
cormorant, "Neotropical" is the correct adjectival form."

Comments from Remsen: "NO. Suspecting that the many erudite
people, even though most were Americans, who have NOT previously balked at
"Neotropic" would NOT have perpetuated a spelling or grammatical
error, sure enough Webster's Unabridged, often regarded as the premier
authority for American English, gives "Neotropic" as the second
spelling. Therefore, Neotropic is no more incorrect than similarly formed
adjectives such as "biologic," "geologic," and
"geographic" (as in National Geographic Society). Given that every
change has its cost in terms of loss of stability and increase in confusion, I
do not think it is worth it to switch from secondary to primary form. [By the
way, Webster's also considers Neotropic etc. the adjectival form of the proper
name Neotropics, so the frequent use of "neotropical" in Neotropical
bird literature is incorrect É pass
it on.]. P.S. If we adopt primary spelling in all English names, then we also
have to switch "Mitred" to Mitered (Parakeet)."

Additional comments from
Thomas Donegan: "I am not sure I agree fully
with Van Remsen's points above. As regards "Neotropic" being an
adjective like "Geographic", this would seem a case of apples being
mixed with oranges. "Geographic" and the other words mentioned are
adjectival derivatives of nouns ending in a "y".
"Geography" is the noun; "Geographic" (or
"Geographical") is the adjective. Where the noun itself ends in
"ic" or "-ics", the adjective usually takes a different
form to avoid confusion. So something relating to "Mathematics" is
"Mathematical" not "Mathematic". Something relating to
"Systematics" is not "Systematic" (which means something
completely different). Something relating to a "Tropic" or the
"Tropics" is "Tropical". "Neotropics" is a derivative
of "Tropics". We do not hear news of a "Tropic Storm"
hitting an otherwise temperate region or of someone's plans to spend their
holidays on a "Tropic Island". "Tropical" is the correct
adjective, as so is "Neotropical". "Tropicbird" is a
strange exception, perhaps, but we are not talking about that here and that
word is firmly established as a word in the English language in its own right.
English is a living language and things change. Also, thankfully, unlike the
French, we do not have any language police enforcing one spelling or other.
However, I would have thought that a formal committee such as SACC ought to be
following and propogating established spellings rather than seeking to innovate
in this sphere or adopt little-used secondary spellings or spelling mistakes.

"Separately, the "Mitred" /
"Mitered" Parakeet issue is also a rather different kettle of fish.
In the UK, "Mitre[d]" is the primary spelling, with
"Miter[ed]" mentioned as the US version in dictionaries which mention
alternative US spellings. I understand that the treatment is the other way
round west of the Atlantic. UK / US spelling issues were subject to a separate
proposal, including discussion of this species. "Neotropic" is at
best a secondary spelling and at worst a spelling mistake in major countries
where English is spoken.

Additional comments from Remsen: "With respect to Thomas's comments
above, I reiterate that "Neotropic" is NOT a spelling error but a
secondary form accepted by the premier authority on American English (which
evidently failed to consult Edward Dickinson or Thomas Donegan), and has
persisted without challenge for 60+ years. Further, SACC is only following
previous standardized lists. If SACC were in charge of coming up with a
standardized list of English names from scratch, then I would go with the
primary usage, namely Neotropical, but part of our obligation, in my view, is
not to make changes unless necessary. Each change bears a cost in terms of
making obsolete the many publications that used the previous name."

Comments from Robbins: "To be honest, it doesn't make a
difference to me. Especially given that the species isn't even restricted to
the Neotropics. For the sole reason of not making yet another name change with
this taxon, I vote "NO".

Comments from Zimmer: "NO. This really doesn't seem to be
important enough to warrant the bother of changing the name yet again."

Comments from Jaramillo: "NO. To me name stability in this case
strongly overrides the request to change to a perhaps more proper name
grammatically, although I agree with Van that it is not an incorrect name.
Balance on this is to leave it as it is."